Overwhelming Overpower: A Controller Inherent Buff - Control AVs and GMs!

[skoryy]

2 minutes ago, Blackfeather said:

...speaking of which. More Controller talk in this thread by @skoryy that I noticed - any thoughts you might have on the proposal here?

My preferred solution is actually break bars, but I don't think this is a bad idea either.

[Blackfeather]

1 minute ago, skoryy said:

My preferred solution is actually break bars, but I don't think this is a bad idea either.

I think that was mentioned a few posts into this thread - something by @FoulVileTerror I believe? Something like a third bar that could be worked away on was their proposal, or something along those lines.

 

What do you mean by break bars, out of curiosity?

[skoryy]

Just now, Blackfeather said:

I think that was mentioned a few posts into this thread - something by @FoulVileTerror I believe? Something like a third bar that could be worked away on was their proposal, or something along those lines.

 

What do you mean by break bars, out of curiosity?

What Terror mentioned: A third bar that could be whittled down by continued application of status effects.  Once it gets to 0, boom: The AV/GM goes stunned or some other affect and all attacks get bonus damage.  Then the bar fills back up and the cycle continues.

[FoulVileTerror]

I brought up the Resolve mechanic as a potential solution to the dual problems of Controls not really being meaningful in a damage-as-means-to-progress meta, AND in this being a game nominally about being heroes and villains, but ultimately all conflict resolution coming down to violence.

But that's really a topic for a different thread.  This one's your baby, @Blackfeather.  At most, I would be curious to know if you feel that both our solutions would be necessary or beneficial in a theoretical situation where both were applied.

[Blackfeather]

4 minutes ago, FoulVileTerror said:

I brought up the Resolve mechanic as a potential solution to the dual problems of Controls not really being meaningful in a damage-as-means-to-progress meta, AND in this being a game nominally about being heroes and villains, but ultimately all conflict resolution coming down to violence.

But that's really a topic for a different thread.  This one's your baby, @Blackfeather.  At most, I would be curious to know if you feel that both our solutions would be necessary or beneficial in a theoretical situation where both were applied.

Hmm...I'll admit, they do sound a little bit much when combined together. Overwhelming Overpower is perhaps more conservative in its scope, which means that it's potentially limited in what it can do to help the whole 'binary controls' thing.

 

Resolve sounds interesting, especially if it were combined with the whole 'progressive mez' idea tossed about in this thread as well - reach specific points, cause specific effects. That being said, it's something a little larger in scope than I can properly envision...probably one of the reasons why I went the route I did here! 😅

[Blackfeather]

8 minutes ago, skoryy said:

What Terror mentioned: A third bar that could be whittled down by continued application of status effects.  Once it gets to 0, boom: The AV/GM goes stunned or some other affect and all attacks get bonus damage.  Then the bar fills back up and the cycle continues.

It's definitely an interesting thought, though I'd personally go with specific thresholds to break away from the whole 'binary controls' thing that the current system relies on with Magnitude. Otherwise, it does feel somewhat like the Magnitude system of status effects, except Holds don't wear off until they build enough charge, you know? At least, from how I'm seeing it...I'll look forward to when you end up making a proper write up on it!

[Blackfeather]

@Tacheyon may I interest you in something tangentially related to this in a potential Controller Inherent buff proposal? Always happy to get some feedback/critique from people most familiar with the archetype!

[Blackfeather]

Additionally, I quite liked your posts on balance and the like from this thread, specifically this, @zenblack - as such, I'd definitely be interested in hearing your thoughts on this change if you've the time and it's something you're interested in, since it's a fairly large one for Controllers!

 

I tried to aim for a happy medium between "let their primary do some work against AVs/EBs outside of whenever they 'let' them (i.e. Purple Triangles)" and "avoid trivialising big bads and statue-ing them permanently in place". Do you think this proposal attempting to provide this went too far? Too little? Something else entirely? Would be glad to hear your thoughts!

[zenblack]

1 hour ago, Blackfeather said:

Additionally, I quite liked your posts on balance and the like from this thread, specifically this, @zenblack - as such, I'd definitely be interested in hearing your thoughts on this change if you've the time and it's something you're interested in, since it's a fairly large one for Controllers!

 

I tried to aim for a happy medium between "let their primary do some work against AVs/EBs outside of whenever they 'let' them (i.e. Purple Triangles)" and "avoid trivialising big bads and statue-ing them permanently in place". Do you think this proposal attempting to provide this went too far? Too little? Something else entirely? Would be glad to hear your thoughts!

So I read the initial post and I believe I get the idea you are going for. I like how you are trying to layer in the capability of affecting resistant/invulnerable enemies but I don't know if I agree with the direction you want to take your control.

 

The reason is that the hard control is so binary. It doesn't just cut the effectiveness of an AV, which is trying to compete with a 8 man team in terms of actions per second, survivability, and threat (by damage or other), it does too much. Which is why I think most AV/GM's come with nearly all forms of resistance (debuff, endurance, etc) to the point where it doesn't matter if you are inflicting those types of debuffs, they do comparatively little against an AV because it cannot be in those states or they crumble instantly this is why -Res and raw damage are much more effective.

 

---- RANDOM INITIAL Perhaps not well thought out?IDEA

I think in addition to your stacking/force multiplying effect you need to consider "lesser" status that inflict a more minor unresistable effect for each type of control. This affect could have certain levels of effectiveness that improve but require the application of control to maintain/progress. I would perhaps suggest that it requires different types of control to maintain and progress this effect and even has an impact of it's progression.

 

For example. Say you apply the immobilize status. It effects the AV theoretically (though does no immobilize) and you have this minor Overpower 1 debuff lets call IMPAIRED that does -X% defense for X sec. Depending on how the mechanic works, lets say you hit the AV with a hold power that meets whatever criteria that it needs to to change IMPAIRED to HINDERED which provides a different debuff type or combination and perhaps lowers the AV's Stun Protection by X. Alternatively, perhaps you hit the AV with a Disorient while they are IMPAIRED that changes this debuff to DAZED which provides a different debuff type/combination and lowers the AV's Fear Protection by X. So you had control of how you wanted to impact the AV. While on the other hand perhaps if you hit a HINDERED with a Sleep it changes it to SLUGGISH which again provides a different debuff type/combination and affects it with a noticeable recharge debuff and perhaps -Res for X sec

 

This is all very rough and it could work with or a blend of your amplification idea but it would allow a Controller to contribute with their control on those AV fights. All names and effects are just placeholders for options.

 

---- *ALTERNATIVELY*

 

Instead of all that gobbldygook I said use your system but have each Status have a defined soft control effect instead on AV/GM's. So you are able to apply your control but at the same time it's effect can be fine tuned. Thus providing the same effect without going heavy into work with more mechanics. Nice thing about this is you could see your visual control effect on the AV as well.

Edited September 21, 2020 by zenblack
Fixed

[BitCook]

19 hours ago, Blackfeather said:

Same with @BitCook as well - hello there! Saw you talking about crowd control powers in this thread. My proposal attempts to help even out the balance for the lockdown powers of Controllers somewhat. I'd be glad to know what you think about them: any feedback, improvements, critiques, etc. would be much welcome!

Sure took me a moment to read through the thread and think about it.

Before I comment on the idea, part of the problem with controllers is the perception of how they work.  The Dev's had put the PToD in place because they said punching statues is boring and to an extent, they were correct.  However, it is functionally not that much difference in the current environment where a tank can be soft capped to Def and Res and ignore the AV taking all of the aggro.  In each case, the team essentially acts against a helpless foe that is of no threat or consequence to the team.  I always hated the logic behind the PToD because it basically favored a certain style of gameplay for damage mitigation.

For controllers, before I would want to sign on to any proposal for changes, I really feel the underlying assumptions about the class really need to be addressed before meaningful useful changes can be applied.  Additionally, since we overlap with support sets, an examination why support class characters can not buff themselves on a majority of abilities should be revisited in this same conversation as well.  Because the goal is to have fully functioning, fun ATs for use.

Okay, enough of my soapbox.

As for this idea.  I don't mind it.  I think it's probably an easy code solution and works with the existing mechanics.  I think it would address some of the differences in how people see Dominators as better controllers.  I think it would at least allow Controllers to feel a little use in their abilities when fighting tough enemies.  I'm not a huge fan of the unpredictability of it, but at least it gives people a reason to use their powers.

I think probably a better global solution would be to have tangible secondary effects that are essentially unresistable (or high enough to overcome hard targets natural resistance) that occur when you take away the control aspect of a power.  I would think that resisted holds incur some kind of unresisted slow.  Stuns might be a hefty -to hit debuff, or something like that.  Turn the hold powers from being 0/1 binary powers into something that is a noticeable effect.  I would think that the debuff would be something that would be additive for duration, not necessarily something to floor a target or you get back to the same issue you had with trivializing fights.

This would mean that regardless of what control power you used, it would be effective in some manner.  Especially since Controllers and Dominators are given less defenses because their controls are supposed to allow them and their teams to survive.

[Noyjitat]

What would be the point of playing a dominator if a controller could not only hold things much easier but also still have the 2nd strongest buffs/debuffs? Currently its balanced in the fact that a dom is better at controls but has few debuffs but more damage than a controller but still not better damage than a blaster, scrapper or brute.

 

This idea is like giving a tank more damage instead of bringing a brute or scrapper. If you want to hold it and provide additional damage you play a dom, if you want to sometimes hold it while also providing support/debuffs you play a controller. That's how its always been and that's why people play both.

 

I think I might be for upping the chance of that +1 mag a bit higher but you already have a +1 mag hybrid power available that's actually quite nice and often overlooked.

Edited September 21, 2020 by Noyjitat

[BitCook]

32 minutes ago, Noyjitat said:

What would be the point of playing a dominator if a controller could not only hold things much easier but also still have the 2nd strongest buffs/debuffs? Currently its balanced in the fact that a dom is better at controls but has few debuffs but more damage than a controller but still not better damage than a blaster, scrapper or brute.

Because they have Damage to actually kill things.

Don't get me wrong, I think Dominators should have some more defensive options.  But kills speed is ultimately what judges good powers/ATs from others.  There are perhaps a few support sets that people are excited to see... the rest are a lot of MEH from the playerbase.  Not because they don't do some okay stuff, but they don't add things that players typically can't do on their own.  -DEF is great... until you have characters IOed out who can hit +4 on their own.  -ToHit is fantastic, until most characters get to SoftCap.

Kinetics, Storm, Cold, maybe Poison are always going to be welcome... the others... I mean they're nice, but in the typical end game, not really needed all that much because of the power diversification and creep.

[Blackfeather]

6 hours ago, zenblack said:

So I read the initial post and I believe I get the idea you are going for. I like how you are trying to layer in the capability of affecting resistant/invulnerable enemies but I don't know if I agree with the direction you want to take your control.

 

The reason is that the hard control is so binary. It doesn't just cut the effectiveness of an AV, which is trying to compete with a 8 man team in terms of actions per second, survivability, and threat (by damage or other), it does too much. Which is why I think most AV/GM's come with nearly all forms of resistance (debuff, endurance, etc) to the point where it doesn't matter if you are inflicting those types of debuffs, they do comparatively little against an AV because it cannot be in those states or they crumble instantly this is why -Res and raw damage are much more effective.

I definitely agree - control is indeed a very binary affair: one's either affected by it, or they're not. I wanted to give Controllers the chance to lock down AVs/GMs, as I figure that in larger groups of them, they can lock them down anyhow by stacking enough...but that cutoff point means that any control before then (outside of purple triangles) is essentially 'wasted'.

 

I wanted to simulate that sliding scale of effectiveness found in the way AVs/GMs resist other things - debuffs, damage, and so on - by making it fairly unlikely for a single Controller on their own to have their powers work on them, but still include a chance there: impossible to lock down all of the time (like in a scenario with a whole team of Controllers say), but they can at least keep using their Holds knowing that they may have an effect.

 

I wrote up a post a little while back about the likelihood of an Overwhelming Overpower going off; perhaps the odds could do with some adjusting?

6 hours ago, zenblack said:

---- RANDOM INITIAL Perhaps not well thought out?IDEA

I think in addition to your stacking/force multiplying effect you need to consider "lesser" status that inflict a more minor unresistable effect for each type of control. This affect could have certain levels of effectiveness that improve but require the application of control to maintain/progress. I would perhaps suggest that it requires different types of control to maintain and progress this effect and even has an impact of it's progression.

 

For example. Say you apply the immobilize status. It effects the AV theoretically (though does no immobilize) and you have this minor Overpower 1 debuff lets call IMPAIRED that does -X% defense for X sec. Depending on how the mechanic works, lets say you hit the AV with a hold power that meets whatever criteria that it needs to to change IMPAIRED to HINDERED which provides a different debuff type or combination and perhaps lowers the AV's Stun Protection by X. Alternatively, perhaps you hit the AV with a Disorient while they are IMPAIRED that changes this debuff to DAZED which provides a different debuff type/combination and lowers the AV's Fear Protection by X. So you had control of how you wanted to impact the AV. While on the other hand perhaps if you hit a HINDERED with a Sleep it changes it to SLUGGISH which again provides a different debuff type/combination and affects it with a noticeable recharge debuff and perhaps -Res for X sec

 

This is all very rough and it could work with or a blend of your amplification idea but it would allow a Controller to contribute with their control on those AV fights. All names and effects are just placeholders for options.

It's an interesting thought! The way I see how different control powers currently are is that they tend to already have secondary effects attached to them - they just come bundled in with the power itself rather than something inherent with the status effect. For instance, Earth Control has its defense debuffs, and Electric Control has its recovery debuffs.

 

That being said, I am not entirely certain that this would be a path that I'd personally go towards: I like Controllers because of their ability to lock down the battlefield primarily, with their secondary of buffs/debuffs backing them up, you know? So I wanted to keep the control aspect of their powers front and centre, even against tougher opponents, while also ensuring that they didn't trivialise fights in the process. As opposed to providing additional debuff effects, which their secondary already helps with.

 

It's that balance that I'm attempting to achieve, which is why I went the route that I did.

6 hours ago, zenblack said:

Instead of all that gobbldygook I said use your system but have each Status have a defined soft control effect instead on AV/GM's. So you are able to apply your control but at the same time it's effect can be fine tuned. Thus providing the same effect without going heavy into work with more mechanics. Nice thing about this is you could see your visual control effect on the AV as well.

That might be a neat idea, depending on exactly what said soft control effects end up being!

[Replacement]

First off, overall take: I like the idea of the OP, but I feel like it could actually go further.  Up the %s some, but I realize I have not stopped to think through the repercussions of multi-controller effects.

 

That said, I find myself wondering if Protection can be debuffed.  I think this would be tricky since, iirc, that's what mez already is (example: if an enemy has 3 points of Hold Protection and I hit them with a Mag 3 hold, that's actually a -3 debuff to their Hold protection.  Presumably, some separate aspect of the engine is watching for players to register any Protections of 0 or lower to apply status effects to).

 

But, if it could be done, I think it would simply be neat if Overpower was changed to a global proc that made attacks also add a long duration -1 protection.

EDIT: I guess an easier take on my thought there is simply changing Overpower's additional +1 mags to be much longer duration.  Right now, it's about half the primary mez duration, but I think double would be better.  That's a 44 second-ish Hold.  yes, that's scary.  No, I do not think that's an issue at Mag 1.

Edited September 22, 2020 by Replacement

[FoulVileTerror]

An alternative thought occurs . . . 

 

To deal with the problem of Controls being Binary, what if we absolutely gutted their Control Protection and Resistance, and instead gave Archvillains and Giant Monsters the Defiance treatment:   Allow them to get certain attacks through -while- being Controlled.  The higher the Magnitude of Control slapped on them, the fewer Powers they have access to.

 

Ta-da!  A gradient of Control, rather than a binary.

It would take a considerable amount of work to balance, but I think it's at least worth examining.

And hey!  Overwhelming Overpower could still be a thing this way too.

[Replacement]

2 hours ago, FoulVileTerror said:

An alternative thought occurs . . . 

 

To deal with the problem of Controls being Binary, what if we absolutely gutted their Control Protection and Resistance, and instead gave Archvillains and Giant Monsters the Defiance treatment:   Allow them to get certain attacks through -while- being Controlled.  The higher the Magnitude of Control slapped on them, the fewer Powers they have access to.

 

Ta-da!  A gradient of Control, rather than a binary.

It would take a considerable amount of work to balance, but I think it's at least worth examining.

And hey!  Overwhelming Overpower could still be a thing this way too.

I don't think they have the tech for that... I've been digging through RubyRed's data tool and, while I haven't specifically looked into Defiance' mez-ignoring, I've noticed some stuff in the structure in powers makes it look like there are simple flags for whether or not a power is enabled for cast through mez.

 

Short version: I'm 90% sure it's all-or-nothing for a power to cast through mez.

 

So instead, something like giving them 1 attack and 1 other power that straight up defy mez? I assume in place of purple triangles?

[Blackfeather]

18 hours ago, BitCook said:

Before I comment on the idea, part of the problem with controllers is the perception of how they work.  The Dev's had put the PToD in place because they said punching statues is boring and to an extent, they were correct.  However, it is functionally not that much difference in the current environment where a tank can be soft capped to Def and Res and ignore the AV taking all of the aggro.  In each case, the team essentially acts against a helpless foe that is of no threat or consequence to the team.  I always hated the logic behind the PToD because it basically favored a certain style of gameplay for damage mitigation.

 

For controllers, before I would want to sign on to any proposal for changes, I really feel the underlying assumptions about the class really need to be addressed before meaningful useful changes can be applied.  Additionally, since we overlap with support sets, an examination why support class characters can not buff themselves on a majority of abilities should be revisited in this same conversation as well.  Because the goal is to have fully functioning, fun ATs for use.

Hmm...personally speaking, I'm of the notion that the support powersets are generally fine when looking at them as a whole - certainly, there are some that could use some love (waves at @The Philotic Knight's Force Field thread), but they're usually always bringing something to the table, be it additional defense, further damage, picking up allies when they take too much aggro, and so on. At least from how I see it, this is less the case with control powersets depending on the kinds of enemies they face. Those with high levels of protection tend to circumvent the need for such powers as a result.

 

The archetypes with support powersets in them at least in my view do have ways to make up for their relative lack of solo ability - they're generally helping the rest of their team flourish. Certainly, a lot of them can solo, and do so very well, but they'll generally be better suited for teams (many exceptions with specific power choices due to how diverse support powersets are). Dark Miasma for instance lend themselves quite well solo, their survivability aided by controls and ToHit debuffs.

 

That being said, this is discussion is probably worth an entire thread in of itself.

18 hours ago, BitCook said:

As for this idea.  I don't mind it.  I think it's probably an easy code solution and works with the existing mechanics.  I think it would address some of the differences in how people see Dominators as better controllers.  I think it would at least allow Controllers to feel a little use in their abilities when fighting tough enemies.  I'm not a huge fan of the unpredictability of it, but at least it gives people a reason to use their powers.

I definitely wanted to avoid the permanent application of these status effects against tougher foes - it was why I decided to make this proposal chance based in the first place, building on the Overpower mechanic as it currently stands. I also talked about two potential additions to Overwhelming Overpower in my original post as well, one that had a more variable magnitude bonus, along with ways to increase the chance of an Overpower. Kind of like building crits on a Stalker, or something along those lines.

 

Additionally, I ran through some napkin math numbers on the likelihood of at least one Overwhelming Overpower triggering a little while back - what do you think of the current frequency?

18 hours ago, BitCook said:

I think probably a better global solution would be to have tangible secondary effects that are essentially unresistable (or high enough to overcome hard targets natural resistance) that occur when you take away the control aspect of a power.  I would think that resisted holds incur some kind of unresisted slow.  Stuns might be a hefty -to hit debuff, or something like that.  Turn the hold powers from being 0/1 binary powers into something that is a noticeable effect.  I would think that the debuff would be something that would be additive for duration, not necessarily something to floor a target or you get back to the same issue you had with trivializing fights.

This would mean that regardless of what control power you used, it would be effective in some manner.  Especially since Controllers and Dominators are given less defenses because their controls are supposed to allow them and their teams to survive.

I'm...of mixed minds about this. Similarly to my response to Zen's post, I kind of view the control aspect of control powers to be their main draw, with the secondary effects that come with it as an extra sort of thing, you know? At the moment for instance, Darkness Control does provide -ToHit in a lot of their powers.

 

I figure that the Controller's secondary already works in that role for the most part, especially with some powersets moreso than others. Additionally, I figured that Overwhelming Overpower being chance based helped to create a 'gradient' of its own - Controllers this way can't lock down big bads unless multiple of them are on a team, but now when they're alone, they can still do so on occasion. That being said, if you're looking at something less of a 'binary', what do you think of @FoulVileTerror's suggestion here?

Edited September 22, 2020 by Blackfeather

[Zepp]

Still thinking about these proposed mechanics.

 

It's been clear for a long while (since the control nerf to avoid the theoretical possibility of a city of statues problem) that AVs and GMs negated large parts of the Control and Debuff arsenals. I think adjustments to the current inherent along the lines of the initial proposal may help.

[Blackfeather]

15 hours ago, Noyjitat said:

This idea is like giving a tank more damage instead of bringing a brute or scrapper. If you want to hold it and provide additional damage you play a dom, if you want to sometimes hold it while also providing support/debuffs you play a controller. That's how its always been and that's why people play both.

I'm not sure if this is an entirely accurate analogy to what I'm proposing. Both Dominators and Controllers have control powers as their primary. In other words, they're going to be generally better at it than those with it as their secondary (none of which exist at the moment), similar to how Tankers have higher numbers for their armour powers compared to Brutes or Scrappers.

14 hours ago, Noyjitat said:

What would be the point of playing a dominator if a controller could not only hold things much easier but also still have the 2nd strongest buffs/debuffs? Currently its balanced in the fact that a dom is better at controls but has few debuffs but more damage than a controller but still not better damage than a blaster, scrapper or brute.

My intention with Overwhelming Overpower definitely wasn't to make Controllers overshadow Dominators - the way I see it, Domination supplies Dominators with oodles of magnitude and duration, to the point where one alone has the potential to lock tougher enemies down to quite the reliable degree. In other words, they have potent controls, backed up with damage.

 

I wanted to provide Controllers with similar potency in their primary, but tried to be cognisant of how Dominators control enemies, and to avoid stepping on their toes. This is part of the reason why Overwhelming Overpower works on a chance basis - per my original post, I wanted to have Dominators come out on top when it comes to consistent and strong lockdown potential, to help differentiate the two.

 

Controller vs. Dominator: AV Edition

To compare, let me run through a hypothetical example between a Dominator with perma-Domination and a Controller with Overwhelming Overpower against an AV. With a Magnitude 6 Hold, a Dominator would need 9 uses of their power to lock the AV down (6 * 9 = 54) - once they have done so, they are permanently held so long as the Dominator keeps this up, no ifs or buts.

 

In comparison, with 9 applications of their Hold power, the likelihood of this Controller to have triggered an Overpower strong enough to hold an AV is 37% (19/20 ^ 9 gives us a 63% chance of no such Overpower occurring). Additionally, even if they manage to do so, the chance of doing so again in the duration while the AV is still held is slim - there is less staying power in their abilities.

 

In other words, the Dominator given time, is certain to lock down even the strongest foes and keep them that way. The Controller has the potential to lock down stronger enemies, sometimes faster or slower, but never permanently.

[Blackfeather]

10 hours ago, Replacement said:

First off, overall take: I like the idea of the OP, but I feel like it could actually go further.  Up the %s some, but I realize I have not stopped to think through the repercussions of multi-controller effects.

 

That said, I find myself wondering if Protection can be debuffed.  I think this would be tricky since, iirc, that's what mez already is (example: if an enemy has 3 points of Hold Protection and I hit them with a Mag 3 hold, that's actually a -3 debuff to their Hold protection.  Presumably, some separate aspect of the engine is watching for players to register any Protections of 0 or lower to apply status effects to).

 

But, if it could be done, I think it would simply be neat if Overpower was changed to a global proc that made attacks also add a long duration -1 protection.

EDIT: I guess an easier take on my thought there is simply changing Overpower's additional +1 mags to be much longer duration.  Right now, it's about half the primary mez duration, but I think double would be better.  That's a 44 second-ish Hold.  yes, that's scary.  No, I do not think that's an issue at Mag 1.

I did propose a means of improving the chances a little in my original post, if in a slightly roundabout way - though likewise, I'm not the most certain about how the numbers should be. Basically, it'd up the chance of Overpower occurring depending on some condition.

Spoiler

+Chance to Overpower

Another idea that's come to mind is letting the actual chance for the Overpower effect occur more frequently depending on a stacking bonus, similar to how Stalkers can build higher chances for critical hits. Potential ideas for 'stacks' (of let's say 5%) could be:

• Stacking percentage based on how many status effects on an enemy are applied (even if they aren't affecting them)
  • E.g. Controller attempts to Hold + Sleep + Confuse an AV, chance to Overpower is now 20% + (5% + 5% + 5%) = 35% chance
• Stacking percentage based on how many recent control powers have been used (time pending)
• Stacking percentage based on previous controls that weren't an Overpower (increase chance if it hasn't happened lately)
  • E.g. Controller's previous two controls were regular ones, chance to Overpower is now 20% + (5% + 5%) = 30% chance

Additionally, I did some napkin math in this post about the odds of Overwhelming Overpower as a little scenario sort of thing - helps to better visualise the chances of it all and so on, I find! There's also a nice one that I made to compare against a Dominator here. Might help to figure out what numbers would be best!

[BitCook]

6 hours ago, Blackfeather said:

I definitely wanted to avoid the permanent application of these status effects against tougher foes - it was why I decided to make this proposal chance based in the first place, building on the Overpower mechanic as it currently stands. I also talked about two potential additions to Overwhelming Overpower in my original post as well, one that had a more variable magnitude bonus, along with ways to increase the chance of an Overpower. Kind of like building crits on a Stalker, or something along those lines.

 

Additionally, I ran through some napkin math numbers on the likelihood of at least one Overwhelming Overpower triggering a little while back - what do you think of the current frequency?

I think the frequency is  a little low if this is the only fix that's put into place.  It's really easy to make Perma Dom, and no one complains about them being too OP.  Even with being able to one shot hold bosses, they are still considered relatively weak.  So I think you could up them a little and still not really be any big deal for a majority of the player base.  If you want to "fix" controllers with this, then it probably need to come up enough that it's something that you count on perhaps half or more of the time.  I don't think that giving a +1 mag 60% or more of the time would be that unbalanced.  Again, Dom's are already there 100% of the time and no one complains about them.

At the end of the day, there are several playstyles that need to be examined.
Solo - The controller needs their controls to make up for Middle Tier Defense, bad damage, and terrible HPs.  This idea helps them a little, but probably not enough for them to do things that a lot of other ATs take for granted unless the frequency is upped a lot.  They need their controls to land with reliability and being able to juggle two bosses is not that uncommon.

Team - It works better here at low frequency because at present no one counts on Controls to really make an impact.  While it makes most of your casts worthwhile, it doesn't give you a role to play if there is no Tank/Brute to eat an Alpha.  In the 25-45 range, controllers are still pretty similar to Live and that's really where they can mostly fill their roll.  They can stop a good chunk of an Alpha and have some other powers to get the Bosses or Heal/Absorb/Dodge enough incoming damage to survive.

AV/GMs - It makes each cast worth using, but probably doesn't make anyone care if you are there or not.  Makes the controller feel pretty cool when you hold a hard target.  Frequency for this is fine, although I still think giving them a higher chance of +1 Mag makes then better at stacking and thus a little more useful.

Farming - No real help as it's not predictable to make much difference.  Farm characters already have enough defense that they can soak Alpha as it is.  If the frequency of a +1 is higher, then it might help them enough that we would see a few more farming controllers again.

 

So the idea in all cases helps although for me, I'd up the frequency of a +1.  I think it's relatively easy to code as it uses existing mechanics and the mag system is well understood.  It gives a reason to cast and given that Doms have long had 1 shot boss holds, doesn't break anything.

 

6 hours ago, Blackfeather said:

I'm...of mixed minds about this. Similarly to my response to Zen's post, I kind of view the control aspect of control powers to be their main draw, with the secondary effects that come with it as an extra sort of thing, you know? At the moment for instance, Darkness Control does provide -ToHit in a lot of their powers.

 

I figure that the Controller's secondary already works in that role for the most part, especially with some powersets moreso than others. Additionally, I figured that Overwhelming Overpower being chance based helped to create a 'gradient' of its own - Controllers this way can't lock down big bads unless multiple of them are on a team, but now when they're alone, they can still do so on occasion. That being said, if you're looking at something less of a 'binary', what do you think of @FoulVileTerror's suggestion here?

The controller, like other classes that rely on debuff has a resisted debuff.  So the values that you would rely on get drastically reduced.  There are a lot of threads about this.  I would propose that allow Controllers and Doms to have an additional UNRESISTED debuff based on the control that was resisted.

So yes, say you are hitting an AV with a hold.  If the secondary effect is -rchg, make it decent, say -30% and both unresistable and unstackable.  So if two people have failed holds, you are still at -30%, just the duration extends.  The AV is quasi held, and there is damage mitigation to the team that is noticeable. 

I agree that the control is the main draw.  However, when it is binary with long durations, you don't have much options against hard targets other than make them totally trivial, or make the controller totally trivial.  There are no other powers in the game that are essentially ignored in content.  Your damage can be reduced, but you still do damage if they have high resistance.  Your debuffs are reduced, but they still count for something.  I think that there should be an effect every time that you case.  Even if it's something less than you wanted.  However, that takes a lot of new code and mechanics and might be out of the capabilities of a volunteer development team.

[Darkneblade]

I didn't do math but these should help controllers more I think

3 Mag mez

+ Chance to double mez already you have. So if you hit with 3+1 mag. it becomes 6+2 mag.

Similar to critical hit I think. It is still unreliable but it is better than what we have so far.

Also Containment damage bonus should include Pet's damage as well. With Fear and Confuse for added effect for obvious reasons.

Controller's damage(outside of fire/illusion)so pitiful low that they actually have to remove protection to immobilize due player protests on AV's as seen here https://hcwiki.cityofheroes.dev/wiki/Purple_Triangles

 

Edited September 22, 2020 by Darkneblade

[BitCook]

49 minutes ago, Darkneblade said:

Controller's damage(outside of fire/illusion)so pitiful low that they actually have to remove protection to immobilize due player protests on AV's as seen here https://hcwiki.cityofheroes.dev/wiki/Purple_Triangles
 

Well it had more to do with Controllers then being totally useless... and, the Melee people all getting mad that they had to move to fight the AVs who ran all over the place.

[SeraphimKensai]

On 9/20/2020 at 3:13 AM, Blackfeather said:

I should probably ping @SeraphimKensai about this suggestion as well - I recall you talking about changing AoE Holds a little while back, so I imagine you've got a fair grasp on how Controllers/Dominators currently function. As such, if you've any stance on this sort of thing - improvements, critiques, etc. - I'd be glad to hear about them!

I have been summoned.

Sorry I haven't been playing too much lately, but I can definitely insert my 2 cents to the discussion as my rest has been disturbed.

 

Right now from an AoE Hold perspective there's really no reason to roll a controller having a base 240 second recharge, whereas newer blaster secondaries have AoE holds in them have a 90 second base recharge for the same magnitude as a controller minus the overpower proc. Then blaster's damage scale is far superior to a controllers.

 

That said I love controllers, I think I have maybe 8 incarnate controllers that I've IO'd out at this point. I also have 3 incarnate IO'd Domi's as well.

 

Between the two, Domi's once again have a stronger primary between the two due to domination. I don't think anyone can reasonably argue otherwise. Controllers secondary buffs and debuffs can really shine especially when stacked, but a team of 8 permadoms can be insane as well, just like a team of 8 defenders or peacebringers or any stacked AT.

 

As an AT inherent overpowe, as it is, is mediocre at best. If changing the Overpower mechanic is on the table I think controllers would be better served by a revamp such as:

"For every mezzed target the controller currently has, the controller receives a recharge reduction towards it's AoE holds/stuns/sleeps/etc" (perhaps 10% recharge redux for an AoE Mez active since they either in 90 seconds for AoE soft controls, 5% recharge redux for targets under a single target hold/Imob/confuse, and 2.5% for mobs under an AoE Imob?).

 

That way it rewards a controller for controlling with more frequent access to it's long recharging AoE powers. This would help change the dynamic between controllers and dominators while still sticking to the core cottage rule of the AT.

 

Thanks though and hopefully something good comes to controllers down the way.

Edited September 22, 2020 by SeraphimKensai

[Blackfeather]

8 hours ago, BitCook said:

I think the frequency is  a little low if this is the only fix that's put into place.  It's really easy to make Perma Dom, and no one complains about them being too OP.  Even with being able to one shot hold bosses, they are still considered relatively weak.  So I think you could up them a little and still not really be any big deal for a majority of the player base.  If you want to "fix" controllers with this, then it probably need to come up enough that it's something that you count on perhaps half or more of the time.  I don't think that giving a +1 mag 60% or more of the time would be that unbalanced.  Again, Dom's are already there 100% of the time and no one complains about them.

Did you take a look at the Potential Further Ideas section of the original post? There, I discussed a rough proposal about ways to increase the Controller's chance to Overpower. I'll copy it over now:

Spoiler

+Chance to Overpower

Another idea that's come to mind is letting the actual chance for the Overpower effect occur more frequently depending on a stacking bonus, similar to how Stalkers can build higher chances for critical hits. Potential ideas for 'stacks' (of let's say 5%) could be:

• Stacking percentage based on how many status effects on an enemy are applied (even if they aren't affecting them)
  • E.g. Controller attempts to Hold + Sleep + Confuse an AV, chance to Overpower is now 20% + (5% + 5% + 5%) = 35% chance
• Stacking percentage based on how many recent control powers have been used (time pending)
• Stacking percentage based on previous controls that weren't an Overpower (increase chance if it hasn't happened lately)
  • E.g. Controller's previous two controls were regular ones, chance to Overpower is now 20% + (5% + 5%) = 30% chance

I'd be interested in getting your opinion on this mechanic, along with any critiques/suggestions you might have about it!

 

Another thing that's also important to keep in mind is that Dominators don't have perma-Domination out of the box. It takes a good amount of work and levels to get them there, with lots of recharge bonuses, and sometimes sacrifice in other aspects. I imagine @oedipus_tex would agree with this, given their love of Dominators.

 

By upping the chance to Overpower out of the box, I think that might potentially step on the Dominator's toes. My intention with keeping the chance to Overpower the same as before was to help differentiate the archetypes to some degree. Dominators eventually build up to be more powerful and reliable, while Controllers are more variable.

 

Also something to keep in mind is that by keeping the chance to Overpower the same, the Controller has another direct incentive to actually slot their status effect powers somewhat: they want to make their Overwhelming Overpower last, and to help encourage it to happen more often, they can slot the power for more recharge, thus 'rolling the dice' more often.

 

The stance that I'm coming from with the introduction of this mechanic is that I don't really think Controllers are 'broken' in the first place - they're generally an enjoyable archetype for me to play, but it'd be nice if they could actually do something with their control powers while facing stronger enemies.

8 hours ago, BitCook said:

The controller, like other classes that rely on debuff has a resisted debuff.  So the values that you would rely on get drastically reduced.  There are a lot of threads about this.  I would propose that allow Controllers and Doms to have an additional UNRESISTED debuff based on the control that was resisted.

So yes, say you are hitting an AV with a hold.  If the secondary effect is -rchg, make it decent, say -30% and both unresistable and unstackable.  So if two people have failed holds, you are still at -30%, just the duration extends.  The AV is quasi held, and there is damage mitigation to the team that is noticeable. 

I agree that the control is the main draw.  However, when it is binary with long durations, you don't have much options against hard targets other than make them totally trivial, or make the controller totally trivial.  There are no other powers in the game that are essentially ignored in content.  Your damage can be reduced, but you still do damage if they have high resistance.  Your debuffs are reduced, but they still count for something.  I think that there should be an effect every time that you case.  Even if it's something less than you wanted.  However, that takes a lot of new code and mechanics and might be out of the capabilities of a volunteer development team.

Well, that's the thing - I think that kind of pulls Controllers and Dominators in an entirely different direction. There are very few abilities in CoH that are actually unresistable. The one that comes to mind is the -ToHit component of Flash Arrow, and that only deals something like 5%.

 

If debuffs being less useful at higher notoriety levels is indeed a problem, then that's something that's overarching, and shouldn't be used to justify granting only Controllers/Dominators this - that'd be a separate suggestion entirely: to change how the purple patch/AV resistance works, or making a portion of debuffs across the board unresistable.

 

As for the binary system, I figure that it's something that won't be changing any time soon - the least intrusive way to work with this in my mind is to create a gradient of one's own, which is where taking advantage of the places where it isn't binary. In this case, that's Overpower, and thus the reason why I decided to go the route of tweaking it. A control power that works 100% of the time 20% of the time effectively circumvents this whole binary issue, you know?